d) Property (rental) income

This is relatively stable at present. Recent rent reviews indicate that our commercial rents are in line with the current market for property of similar quality. Charging higher rents would entail a large investment in improvements which, given the limitations of the building, would probably not cover their cost. The property is currently bringing in a reasonable level of income in relation to its nature, and no change should be made to the lettings policy under current conditions of use. However, rental income is vulnerable to unexpected repair costs, void periods and brokerage costs where there is a change of tenancy. Its procurement is also costly in terms of staff time that could otherwise be spent on core RAI work. The possibilities for alternative use of the premises are addressed in section 6. Professional advice is being taken and arrangements have been made (September 2003) for a survey of the building in order to estimate its rental potential with reasonable accuracy; and to put in place, where necessary, a maintenance and repair programme.

e) Grants and donations; sponsorship and fundraising

The RAI has achieved considerable success in the past in attracting funds in the form of bequests, donations and grants. These have almost exclusively been applied to specified activities (child-focused anthropology, urgent anthropology, retrospective digitisation of the AIO, etc). This success reflects a general strength and intangible asset of the RAI: that it is seen as an appropriate home for innovative work which in turn can attract external funding. It is important that this reputation for openness to fundable new projects should be preserved and cultivated.

It is the general experience of voluntary bodies that core funding is very much more difficult to secure than project funding. Donations and bequests from individuals that can be used for the general support of the Institute are, of course, always welcome; but these should be regarded as a bonus rather than the primary target of fundraising. The social and demographic structure of the academic profession is very different now from that which made possible the massive endowments from individuals such as Edmund Leach and W. B. Fagg. From within the profession, we are in future most likely to receive smaller donations and bequests, and gifts in kind such as archive material. Success in recruiting non-anthropologist general benefactors will increasingly be contingent on the Institute's overall success in making a case for the public utility of anthropology. Anthropology in and of itself is not a 'cause' likely to attract altruistic charitable giving, unless explicit links with the aims of potential donors can be forged and convincingly argued.

Fundraising has become a highly professionalised activity in its own right. If carried out in-house by a small-scale body such as the RAI, it is extremely expensive in staff resources, and in opportunity costs. Professional fundraisers are expensive in relation to the results to be expected. Although some operate on a contingency basis, they must demand a high percentage fee for success to compensate for their own business risk.
Project-funding applications (eg to foundations and trusts) are best written by specialists who know the subject-matter and will carry out the project. Where approaches to potential (eg corporate) donors for core funding are feasible, again they are most effectively made from inside the RAI, by persons who can 'tap into' networks and make a convincing case for the relevance of anthropology to the donor's own concerns.
Because the RAI is too small-scale an organisation to warrant either an in-house 'development' post or the outsourcing of fundraising to external professionals, the balance that is achieved will always be a compromise. Fundraising can be made more streamlined by compiling a portfolio of fundable projects, and matching these against the known rules and priorities of prospective funders.

New fundraising opportunities may be created by the proposed Centre for Anthropology at the British Museum, with the Anthropology Library in the North Wing at its heart (see also section 8).

f) Earned income from activities

The RAI has for some time been moving towards a more professional use of its existing assets for the responsible generation of income. More can be achieved in the medium and long terms to boost income from the film and photo collections, especially given the RAI's success in recruiting officers with particular abilities in this area. The RAI also has other assets capable of being developed for income generation, such as the published material in which we hold copyright.

Further options exist for development of new income-generating activities, on a fee-for-service basis in sharp distinction from the membership services considered in section 2. Realism is needed; some kinds of service would require the creation of 'mini-businesses' involving staffing and resources on a scale beyond the Institute's scope. Consideration has been given to whether the RAI should run its own annual conference, and/or develop a programme of professional training, for the sake of income generation. The conclusion is that as income-earners these would be of marginal value; any decision to engage in them should be made on operational, not financial, grounds.

One of the RAI's options for earning fee-for-service income lies in positioning itself as an intermediary body or broker in the supply of services by the discipline to external users. The RAI, through its members and Fellows, has access to specialised knowledge and expertise, together with the discipline's heritage of theoretical insights and research methods, which together constitute a formidable resource base. Areas in which such a brokerage role may feasibly be developed include:

* commissioned ethnographic research
* consultancy /advisory services
* bibliographic and other research services using the resources of the Library, Index and MS collection, for which an access fee could be charged to non-affiliates

These and similar options should be actively developed, in liaison with partner organisations where appropriate.

2. Costs

The RAI's most significant regular cost items, net of any corresponding income, are (not in order)

a) Staff costs (salaries and employer overheads)
b) Library costs excluding staff costs
c) General administration and office costs excluding staff costs
d) Costs of mounting events such as special lectures, AGM
e) Property costs including mortgage payments

From 2003, general office costs will be increased by the addition of professional technical IT administration (approved by Council in June 2002). Within the period covered by this review, a further increased cost item is expected to be investment in a new online membership directory (one-off setup cost followed by regular maintenance costs). This project is currently (2003) on hold pending availability of funds.

Cost control

a) Staff costs

Economising on staff costs is not proposed. New appointments made in 2002-3 and new pension benefits will increase the future baseline salary costs on which inflation increments and pension payments, where applicable, will in turn be based.

b) Library costs

Consequent upon Council's decision to continue investment in the Library and its development as a primary resource, there is no scope for cost reduction at present. Given the scale of the RAI's support for the Library in relation to the use made of it and to the Institute's overall financial position, this investment may prove hard to sustain and defend in the longer term. The establishment of the proposed Centre for Anthropology may however make continued investment in the Library easier to justify in future.

c) General administration and office costs

Control of administrative costs is essential and is being practised. At the same time, it must be recognised that good administration is necessary to the success of substantive and income-earning activities. The Institute is not an overstaffed or extravagantly run office, and there is little or no scope for significant reduction of administrative costs.

d) Costs of mounting events

As stated in section 9, the RAI should retain its 'hosting' role in relation to special events and the 'solidary rituals' of the discipline. There is however scope for some cost control, subject to the need to mount events to an acceptable standard.

e) Property costs

Again, there is no scope for significant cost reduction. The cost of the survey currently being carried out (see above) should be offset by savings from a timely maintenance / repair programme.

3. Conclusion and recommendation

Scope for cost reduction is severely limited in the light of Council's recent decisions on investment priorities; and of the RAI's already frugal operating practices. The route to financial stability must lie with a combination of improved service provision, good communication with the RAI's constituencies, and new / expanded earned income streams, coupled with an approach to fundraising in which project funding can be made to cover as great a proportion of overheads as is compatible with funding conditions. There is scope for enhancement of earned income through new fee-for-service activities and through development of the income potential of existing assets. A major fundraising programme needs to be designed, comprising a portfolio of activities and centred on the need for upgraded premises. The specialist Committees should be invited to contribute to a co-ordinated 'shopping list' of fundable projects. The fundraising opportunities afforded by the proposed British Museum Centre for Anthropology should be exploited as soon as the plans are sufficiently firm.

SECTION 5
MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AND STAFFING (back to top)

1. The current position

1.1 Staffing

The regular staff complement in September 2003 is as follows:

Total staff: 14 excluding external service providers, volunteers, consultants and temporary posts
FTE: approx 7.2 (all staff are part-time except the Director and Office Manager)

1.2 Salaries, employment conditions and staff benefits

There are no fixed salary scales, increments or London weightings. All salaries are adjusted for inflation each January, based on the previous year's RPI. A stakeholder pension scheme has been set up. We are moving towards greater consistency in staff pay and conditions of employment, with the aim of achieving transparency and fairness in the terms offered to all staff.

The RAI staff in general are not highly paid in relation to their abilities, responsibilities and workload. To some extent this is offset by relatively generous holiday entitlements, our ability to be flexible and informal in the organisation of work, and the job satisfaction many find in working for the RAI. It is also well recognised by staff that the RAI can never match salaries and benefits paid in the non-charity sectors. The experience gained from new appointments made in 2002-3 indicates that RAI posts can attract a strong field of candidates, although some are undoubtedly deterred by the modest salaries offered. We are gratified by the high calibre of appointments that have been made. While current salary levels are broadly in line with the sector as a whole, this may not hold in the longer term, and the balance between rewards and expectations placed on staff needs to be kept under continuing review.

Staff development and training are currently somewhat ad-hoc, but we are from time to time able to send staff on suitable courses and seminars. More could be done in this area.

1.3 Management structure

This is, by tradition, informal, and so far as it is articulated is of the 'shallow pyramid' type, with all staff reporting to the Director and the latter in turn accountable to the President and Council. The Photo Librarian, Film Officer, Library Officer and AT Editor run their own operations, in consultation with the Director who is ultimately responsible. An additional 'layer' exists from time to time where an assistant is supervised by one of the above. The Assistant Director (finance & personnel) handles personnel administration matters, in consultation with the Director. Alongside the above loose management structure, the Photo Librarian, Film Officer, Library Officer and Assistant Director each service their own Committees which guide and direct the specialist content of their work. This division of functions works well.

The largest single management problem is the difficulty in creating the conditions for informal communication and exchange of ideas within the staff group, resulting from part-time work coupled with the fact that staff working at Burlington Gardens (most of whom will transfer to the main Museum site in 2004) are physically cut off from the main Institute site. We are attempting to overcome this as far as possible through periodic meetings of the full staff group, which are proving successful.

2. Trends, tensions and pressure points

The following have become noticeable:

2.1 RAI staff posts are increasingly attracting applications from a wide pool of candidates, many of whom have substantive professional as well as academic credentials. This welcome development results in part from our deliberate efforts to attract such candidates as a means towards enhancing professionalism within the RAI. However, if the Institute is to retain staff, it must in turn meet their professional aspirations.

2.2 Much has been done recently to improve administrative efficiency and technical support within the office. Subject to the resources available, the RAI administration needs to continue its efforts, in order both to support the Institute's operations and to deal gracefully and effectively with its constituencies and publics. However, activities and services must be the investment priorities, and management and administration must not expand beyond present levels at their expense.

2.3 The evergrowing workloads and shrinking resources of universities are placing increasing pressure on some specialist RAI staff functions. With the best of intentions, many Committee members have limited availability to advise and support staff, and to share in the execution of projects. Staff workloads cannot expand to fill this gap. Therefore, activities and commitments must be realistically tailored to the combined available resources of Committees and staff.

2.4 Pressure is likely to grow on salaries, working conditions and benefits. The Institute is a victim of its own success, in the sense that workloads expand faster than capacity unless carefully controlled. While the Institute has always benefited massively, and will continue to benefit, from the loyalty and dedication of its staff, it risks being seriously weakened unless these pressures are anticipated in planning for the long term.

2.5 Coping with change inevitably poses management challenges. Fortunately there is excellent cooperation and goodwill in the office, with all working together to create a solidary staff team under difficult physical conditions. There remains a need for greater clarity and transparency regarding the content and responsibilities of all posts.

3. Recommendations 2003-2006

Staffing

The staffing plan needs to be based on protecting continuity and security, while providing attractive career-development opportunities for all staff, whether on fixed-term or permanent contracts. It is in the RAI's activities and services that the opportunities for growth, including new income-generating projects, are concentrated.

Apart from possible project-funded assistance, the medium-term staffing plan does not commit the RAI to new staff posts. The priority should be investment in the optimal use of existing posts, improved benefits to retain and reward staff, and preparedness for anticipated pressures on the staffing budget as noted above. Aside from future activities entailing project-funded staff, any capacity for additional investment in staffing should be applied to 'buying' more time from existing staff, should they wish to expand their role.

Management and employment conditions

Salary levels and benefits for posts of equivalent responsibility / seniority to be comparable, with scope for variation according to individual qualifications.

All staff to have access to the technical support needed for their functions, and to affordable training opportunities where these can be justified in operational terms.

An annual appraisal system to be in place, based on a written and agreed job description, for all staff members including the Director, to apply to existing staff subject to their individual agreement and to be included in all new employment contracts.

A simple staff manual, setting out basic office procedures, to be in place

Priorities

As and when resources permit, management and staffing priority should be given to:

* investment in the film and photo operations, (including combined development of visual anthropology) as these have the greatest potential at present for growth, service to the membership and discipline, and income generation

* harnessing the power of IT to provide creative expansion of the use potential of our resources (eg dissemination of digitised images)

SECTION 6
PREMISES AND FACILITIES: HOUSING AND USE OF THE COLLECTIONS (back to top)

The power of IT makes it possible for the RAI to function to some extent as a 'virtual centre' providing services and running activities by electronic means. This accepted, the need remains for the Institute to have an acceptable physical location and presence.

1. What premises does the RAI need?

A composite 'wish list' of conditions desirable in any future RAI premises includes:

a) Location in or near central London. If outside central London, travel communications to other parts of the UK must be good. Relocation outside London is ruled out as it would mean losing staff.

b) Office space with provision for flexible use: offices, workstations, reception/display area, space for meetings, smallscale activities such as seminars and social events

c) Scope for creating a Visual Anthropology centre for the proper storage, conservation and supervised use of the film and photo collections together with the manuscripts and archives currently located at Burlington Gardens. This could be combined in multiple use with the activities space under b)

d) Secure public (including disabled) access; open access to fellows, members and student associates; supervised access by appointment to the collections.

The above represents the ideal; in practice, compromises will probably have to be accepted.

2. The collections

The ethnographic video and photo collections, currently located at Fitzroy St, cannot be adequately housed or used in the space presently available there. Conservation of fragile material is barely possible, and there is virtually no capacity either to extend the collections or to display and use them to best effect. In addition, the pressure on storage space is increasing. In 2004 we will have to find space for the RAI archive and MS collections, currently in the basement at Burlington Gardens, for which there will be no permanent accommodation after the Library moves to the main Museum site. The archive and MS collections are themselves important to the discipline, and require staff and facilities for cataloguing and supervised access as well as bare storage space. None of this can be provided in the space we currently occupy at Fitzroy St.

3. The freehold property: financial aspects and options

The purchase of the freehold property in 1987 has proved to be an inspired move. The building, though mortgaged, is an important capital asset. Commercial letting of the parts not occupied by the Institute is, so far, broadly successful.

The primary options for relocation are:

a) Sell 50 Fitzroy St; trade down to a cheaper area where purchase of more suitable premises might be possible;

b) As a), renting new premises and funding rent through investment of the proceeds of sale

c) Rent out the whole of 50 Fitzroy St, using additional rental income to support the lease of new premises.

Relocation could be either to a new independent site, or to premises shared with, or rented from, a compatible partner institution. Relocating the Institute from 50 Fitzroy St would be a major upheaval and itself a costly operation.

Short of full relocation, the following options would keep the main office at Fitzroy St while providing some conservation and use space for the collections:

d) Terminate one or more commercial tenancies at Fitzroy St and reorganise the office space as a whole to provide housing for the collections;

e) Rehouse and manage the collections at a new site (a Visual Anthropology Centre incorporating the MS and archive collections) away from both the Fitzroy St offices and the Library and Index site at the British Museum.

Option d) requires substantial external funding to replace lost rental income and cover the costs of office reorganisation, while e) would depend on a large grant or sponsorship agreement to cover startup and running costs of a separate Visual Centre.

In the broader context of the RAI's investment spread, the preferred option is one under which the RAI would continue to own property, whether at Fitzroy St or elsewhere. In the context of the general integration and mutual enrichment of the Institute's areas of work, there is a strong advantage in keeping as many activities as possible at a single site, despite the need for the Library and Index to be separately located.

4. Advantages and drawbacks of 50 Fitzroy St

4.1 Advantages

* Central location within the orbit of most London colleges and the British Museum; ease of travel access by staff, officers, Council and Committee members (including those outside London)
* Attractive neighbourhood to work in and visit; local facilities and connections good by London standards (a help in recruiting and retaining good staff)
* Appealing character of the building itself, compared with (for example) many University sites

4.2 Drawbacks (with current use of the building)

* Awkward working conditions and minimal scope for expansion
* No scope for reception /welcome of visitors, or social / meeting space
* No possibility of developing an activities programme within the Institute, which would in turn make it an attractive base for Fellows /members (so fostering recruitment and retention)
* Inadequate facilities for storage, conservation, access to and display of the collections
* No disabled access

5. Timing

Because of the problems created by the present situation, it is desirable that permanent housing for the Institute and all its operations be found as soon as possible. However, the only issue of pressing urgency is relocation of the MS and archive collections. A temporary solution to this problem would make it possible to maintain the status quo while funds are secured for a long-term plan.

6. Conclusions and recommendations

6.1 Sale and re-purchase (option 3a) is unlikely to be possible in or near central London.

6.2 Sale and renting of new premises (option 3b) is not recommended as it would deprive the Institute of a permanent capital asset as well as increasing our dependence on investment income for meeting essential operating costs.

6.3 Option 3e (the office remaining at Fitzroy St with a separate site for a Visual Anthropology Centre) is attractive at first glance but is not recommended unless housing can be found within the proposed Centre for Anthropology at the new Museum premises, together with the library and Index. A third RAI site would further fragment the psychological unity of the Institute, as well as its attractiveness to fellows, members and student associates as a physical and spiritual centre. To restore this attractiveness, the Institute needs all the help it can get in the form of mutually enriching activities combined with administration in a single place.

6.4 Option 3c is that of first choice, based partly on specialist advice we have received. It would combine the advantages of selecting space to our own requirements, and preserving the security of long-term property ownership. However, its feasibility clearly depends on further market research to determine the space that could be rented for the proceeds of letting out the whole of 50 Fitzroy St as advantageously as possible. Prospects for cost-efficient sharing of premises and services with compatible partner organisation(s) are also being actively explored.

6.5 50 Fitzroy St also has much to recommend it as a home to the Institute, if by reorganisation of the use of space the drawbacks listed above can be overcome. Under option 3d, investment would be needed in an architect's / designer's feasibility study to ascertain what additional capacity would be created by reoccupation and reorganisation of existing space; and the costs of conversion. Funding would be needed to cover both conversion costs and replacement of lost rental income on an ongoing basis. While the former is not out of the question, the latter is far more problematic. Because no solution is in sight to the problem of replacing regular rental income, this is currently the option of second choice.

SECTION 7
ACTIVITIES AND PROJECTS (back to top)

1. Constraints resulting from current commitments

Current spending commitments set limits to the RAI's ability to select and prioritise among existing or new activities. The RAI's largest investment in activities is in the Library, Index, and the cost of mounting special events and the AGM. Since these, together with other costs and overheads, currently result in a severe deficit risk for the RAI, options